With Pope Benedict XVI saying such outrageous things as describing same-sex marriage as an “obstacle on the road to peace,” or opposing the decriminalization of homosexuality worldwide — including in countries that carry the death penalty even though the Vatican is itself opposed to the death penalty — it’s hard to imagine him surprising us much. And yet, he manages not merely to surprise, but astonish:

The Pope has lifted the excommunication from the Roman Catholic Church of four bishops appointed by a breakaway archbishop more than 20 years ago. One of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre’s appointees, Briton Richard Williamson, outraged Jews by saying the Nazi gas chambers did not exist.

Those views were aired in remarks Williamson gave in a Swedish television interview. In a video of Williamson’s remarks to Swedish television, he says:

I believe that the historical evidence — the historical evidence — is hugely against six million Jews having been deliberately gassed in gas chambers as a deliberate policy of Adolph Hitler.

…

I believe there were no gas chambers. Yes. As far as I have studied the evidence. I’m not going by emotion. I’m going by as far as I’ve understood the evidence. I think, for instance, people who are against what is widely believed today about the quote-unquote the Holocaust, I think that people, those people conclude — the revisionists as they’re called — I think the most serious conclude that between two and three hundred thousand Jews perished in Nazi concentration camps, but not one of them by gassing in a gas chamber.

Williamson went on to cite as his “historical evidence” a so-called gas chamber “expert,” Fred Leuchter, who wrote that the remnants of buildings presented as gas chambers couldn’t have been gas chambers. A brief description of Leuchter’s work is available here, including a thorough debunking of his “investigation.” A more thorough debunking is here.

It turns out that Williamson is a fan of a lot of remarkable anti-Semitic conspiracy theories. In a September 2002 newsletter, Williamson charges that “Judeo-Masonry is known to have been envisaging three World Wars to achieve its unified global domination”:

By lies, Judeo-Masonry brought about the first two World Wars. To get Americans to enter the First World War, President Woodrow Wilson told them that it would be the “war to end all wars.” In fact, WWI established the Masonic League of Nations in Geneva and the Communist Revolution in Russia, and crushed numerous Christian monarchies, in particular the Catholic Austro-Hungarian Empire. And the Masonic Treaty of Versailles ending WWI deliberately paved the way for WWII, of which President F.D. Roosevelt promised it would “make the world safe for democracy.” In fact, WWII established the Masonic United Nations, hugely promoted socialism in the USA and in the Western “democracies,” and crushed the Eastern “democracies” under Communism.

By lies, Judeo-Masonry is preparing for the Third World War. As the Depression of the 1930’s necessitated WWII, triggered for the US by the supposed treachery of the Japanese at Pearl Harbor, so we see all the conditions created for another much worse Depression in the US, with the supposed treachery of Arabs last year against the Twin Towers in New York already igniting American public opinion to go to war against Afghanistan and now Iraq. And as we now in 2002 know with certainty that our governments and media told us far from the complete truth in 1941 as to who was truly responsible for the attack on Pearl Harbor, so we will eventually know that those truly responsible for the attack on the Twin Towers were certainly not those primarily held up as being responsible by our governments and media.

And who is responsible for those Twin Tower attacks? He doesn’t say explicitly, but in another audio clip posted on YouTube, Williamson describes the September 11, 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon as an inside job:

None of you believe that 9-11 is what it was presented to be. It was, of course, the two towers came down, but it was absolutely for certain not two airplanes which brought down those two towers. They were professionally demolished by a series of demolition charges from top to bottom of the towers. …

… [It’s] totally impossible that an airplane struck the Pentagon. A commercial airplane has a very soft nose. You don’t have a nose of titanium and steel. That’s not what an airplane can fly with. If you tried taking off with that, it would nosedive immediately as it lifted off the airport if it had such a heavy nose. The nose of a commercial aircraft is very soft. It’s just a little aluminum covering… the radar of the plane is usually up in the nose. The nose is very soft. Whatever hit the Pentagon punched its way though six of the ten eighteen-inch stone walls between outside the Pentagon and its inner courtyard. There are five rings of buildings, each with an outer and inner wall, and whatever went through the Pentagon went through six of the ten walls before it came to a stop. The photographic evidence is clear as clear can be. The newspapers, of course, did not publish those photographs, but they do exist. Then it can only have been a guided missile which struck the Pentagon.

A Vatican spokesman tried to distance the Vatican from Williamson’s recently-publicized Holocaust revisionism. He said that the lifting of the excommunication “has nothing to do with the personal opinions of a person, which are open to criticism, but are not pertinent to this decree.”

Bishop Bernard Fellay, who now heads the separatist group founded by Lefebvre, the Society of Saint Pius X, refused to condemn Williamson’s anti-Semitic remarks to Swedish telebision. Instead he tried to shift the blame onto the Swedish interviewer for daring to ask “secular” questions:

“Although it had been understood that the interview would deal with religious issues only, the reporter asked the bishop’s opinion concerning historical matters … It is shameful to use an interview on religious matters to introduce secular and controversial issues with the obvious intention of misrepresenting and maligning the activity of our religious Society. Such [a] vile attempt will not reach its goal.”

Q: Bishop Williamson, are these your words: “There was not one Jew killed by the gas chambers. It was all lies, lies, lies.”? Are these your words?

A: There you are quoting from Canada I believe, yes, of many years ago. I believe that the historical evidence — the historical <em>evidence</em> — is hugely against six million Jews having been deliberately gassed in gas chambers as a deliberate policy of Adolph Hitler.

Q: But you say that not one Jew was killed?

A: In gas chambers. I think…

Q: So there was no gas chambers?

A: I believe there were no gas chambers. Yes. As far as I have studied the evidence. I’m not going by emotion. I’m going by as far as I’ve understood the evidence. I think, for instance, people who are against what is widely believed today about the quote-unquote the Holocaust, I think that people, those people conclude — the revisionists as they’re called — I think the most serious conclude that between two and three hundred thousand Jews perished in Nazi concentration camps, but not one of them by gassing in a gas chamber.

You may have heard of the Leuchter Report? Well Fred Leuchter was an expert in gas chambers. He designed three gas chambers for three states, three of the fifty United States, for the execution of criminals. So he knew what’s involved. And he studied what the supposed gas chambers in Germany at some point in the 1980’s, what remains of the supposed gas chambers. The crematoria at Birkenau-Auschwitz, for instance. And his expert conclusion was that it’s impossible for these ever to have served for the gassing of large numbers of people.

Because cyanide gas is very dangerous. Let’s supposing you gas three hundred people that you’ve crowded into one chamber and you gassed them. They’re all wearing some clothes. For instance, if they’re wearing any clothes, it’s very dangerous to go in to pull out the corpses. Because if one whiff of gas that’s trapped in the clothing escapes from the clothing will kill the person. It’s extremely dangerous. Once you’ve gassed people, you’ve got to evacuate the gas to be able to get into the chamber to use it.

To evacuate the gas, you need a high chimney. If it’s a low chimney, the gas goes onto the pavement and kills anybody walking by. You need a high chimney, right? I forget how high he says it must be. If there was a high chimney, then the shadow at most times of day, the shadow would have fallen on the ground. And the Allied arial photographers that flew over the camps would have picked up the shadow of this chimney. There were never such shadows. There was no such chimney. Which, according to Fred Leuchter’s testimony, they can’t have been gas chambers.

He looks at the doors, and he says that the door has to be absolutely airtight because again, the gas escapes and kills the people outside. The doors of the gas chambers that are shown to tourists at Auschwitz are not airtight, absolutely not. You see…

Q: What you’re saying now is that the Holocaust never occurred, not in the way history is written today?

A: I’m saying that I am going by what I judge to be the historical evidence according to people who have observed and examined that evidence. I believe that what they conclude — if they change their conclusion I would be liable to follow their conclusion, because I think they judge by the evidence. I think that two to three hundred thousand Jews perished in Nazi concentration camps, but none of them by a gas chamber.

Q: If this is not anti-Semitism what is anti-Semitism?

A: If anti-Semitism is bad, it’s against truth. If something is true it is not bad. I’m not interested in the word “anti-Semitism.” The word is very dangerous.

Q: The bishop calls you anti-Semitism.

A: The bishop can call me a dinosaur, he can call me an idiot, he can call me what he likes. This is not a question of name calling. This is a question of historical truth. Historical truth goes by evidence and not by emotion.

[edit in video]

There’s certainly been a huge exploitation. Germany has paid out billions and billions of Deutschmarks and now Euros because the Germans have a guilt complex about their having gassed six million Jews. But I don’t think six million Jews were gassed.

Now be careful, I beg of you, this is against the law in Germany. If this were the German state, you could have me thrown into prison before I leave Germany. I hope that is not your intention.

I don’t think that being a horse’s ass is an excommunicatible offense. You are right to condemn Williamson’s remarks but wait and see what the Vatican does with him first before including them in this. It was right to lift the excommunication if Williamson repented of his prior schism. Now if Williamson is given a position somewhere, other than say as titular bishop of Partenia or other such defunct diocese, than I would agree that the Vatican deserves strong condemnation.

Christians and Cathloics are the onws who are dividing the people and stopping the road to peace. I’m sorry to offend I know most Christians and Catholics are excepting and supportive of gays and lesbians but listening to all these stories and the pope who is suppose to be like the “Godfather” of religion and a accepter of all peole talk about homosexuals like this , is surprizingly )alittle) to me, seriously he makes satan look like a heavenly god.

Hyperbole much, Michael? B16 has said some pretty stupid and condemnable things in recent years, but nothing approaching the level of Satan. One would think that outright advocacy of violence against gays, including actually carrying out such, as seen in places like Iran would fall under such a description.

Reading over what Williamson said about gays in one of his letters, he believes that the orientation is just as sinful to God as the activity. Instead of embracing our sexual orientation we should repent of it. And what we (homosexuals) are is nothing more than an idolatry practice which God hates according to his interpretation of St. Paul in Romans which Williamson points out in his letter.

According to Williamson if the Catholic Church accepts a person’s homosexual orientation as a given and its not a sin why not accept the activity as well.

“If the orientation is not so bad, why should the activity be so bad?” – Richard Williamson

Amazing! He sounds like an Exodus spokesperson. Alan and Randy need to hook up with Williamson if they want to drag more Catholics into their misguided fold.

The young Josef Ratzinger had no legal choice in the matter of joining the Hitler Youth. Let me quote Wikipedia:

Following his fourteenth birthday in 1941, Ratzinger was enrolled in the Hitler Youth â€” as membership was required for all 14-year old German boys after December 1939 â€” but was an unenthusiastic member and refused to attend meetings. His father was a bitter enemy of Nazism, believing it conflicted with the Catholic faith, according to biographer John L. Allen, Jr. In 1941, one of Ratzinger’s cousins, a 14-year-old boy with Down syndrome, was killed by the Nazi regime in its campaign of eugenics.

The future Benedict XVI was then forced into the German anti-aircraft corps at the age of 16, and later drafted into the army. He deserted several months after basic training and returned home only to end up in a POW camp.

I’d say he was put through quite a lot as a teenager by the goddamn Nazis. It’s outrageous for you to try to tie him to them and their beliefs.

(Here’s a question: Will elaygee be put on moderation for his slander?)

Benedict never said such hateful things about gays as Williamson does:

Therefore what is “innate”, or in-born, in human nature concerning homosexuality is a violent repugnance. Therefore to speak of homosexuality, or even just an inclination to it, as being “innate” in certain human beings, of course to excuse them, is to accuse God at least of contradiction, if not also of planting in men the cause of sin, which is implicit if not explicit blasphemy.

The very most that can be innate in a man of, for instance, homosexuality, is the raw material for his temperament which may be sensitive in one man, rough in another, but whether that sensitivity or roughness is molded into the compassion of a saint or the vice of a homosexual depends on a series of good or evil choices made by each individual. Homosexuality is a vice, or sinful habit, created by nothing other than a series of sinful acts, for each of which the individual was responsible. Homosexuality is a moral problem, which is why, fascinatingly, St. Paul in the same passage derives it from idolatry! (No space to quote, look it up!)

— “Extensive repetition of third-party propaganda. Your writing must be your own, though you may quote selected short portions of speech by someone else. Reposting of entire posts or articles by another author is strictly forbidden.”

Copying and pasting whole tracts from a Jehovah Witness web site (or any other web site) is a clear violation of our policy. — Jim B.]

My understanding is that refusal to join the Hitlerjugend did not in itself constitute a legally punishable crime: though it might get you into bad odor with the regime.

See these stories:

They consciously said Â»NoÂ« to a regime of injustice – the men and women of the resistance movement, who were bravely willing to face confrontation with the political system.

The students belonging to the WeiÃŸe Rose (White Rose) passed out handbills, the youth opposition groups Swing and EdelweiÃŸpiraten REFUSED TO JOIN the Hitlerjugend (Hitlerâ€™s youth movement). No matter how different their resistance was â€“ they all only had one goal: to make their homeland democratic and free it of war and terror.

But by August 5, 1941, it was clear that Nazi Germany had its own political agenda for Lithuania. It demanded that Lithuania back its war effort; that it organize a Lithuanian Nazi party to spread its doctrine through the educational system and the press; and that it form a Lithuanian leadership to follow Nazi dictates. Lithuanians successfully resisted all these plans, but needless to say, at heavy cost.

The youth REFUSED TO JOIN the “Hitlerjugend” or the “Arbeitsdienst.” Teachers and professors refused to inculcate the Nazi doctrines. Consequently, by early 1943 universities and all other institutions of higher learning were closed. The press went underground. Lithuanians became adversaries of the German Reich and engaged in passive and active resistance. The Nazi doctrines in general, and especially its racial policies towards Jews and Poles, were thwarted by whatever means available under the circum-stances.

Here is someone who left the Hitler Youth and was still accepted as a German soldier:

“Werner also had left the Hitler Youth for his friend Oti Aicher. Oti Aicher also refused to join and as result he wasnâ€™t allowed to participate in the school exams. Aicher later remembered how Werner had tied a swastika scarf round the eyes of the bust of Justice in front of the Ulm Law Courts. Werner was a keen photographer, and most of the surviving pictures of Sophie were taken by him. He died on the Russian front, aged twenty-one.”

— “Extensive repetition of third-party propaganda. Your writing must be your own, though you may quote selected short portions of speech by someone else. Reposting of entire posts or articles by another author is strictly forbidden.”

You may refer other people to another web site via a link for the purposes of furthering a discussion, and you may extract short quotes from other material. But copying and pasting whole tracts from any other web site is a clear violation of our policy– Jim B.]

Reading over what Williamson said about gays in one of his letters, he believes that the orientation is just as sinful to God as the activity. Instead of embracing our sexual orientation we should repent of it.

As I understand Church teaching on this matter, which I strongly disagree with, a same-sex orientation cannot be “embraced” because it is “intrinsically disordered”. It can be accepted as a reality one must live with and of course having such an orientation is not sinful. That is where Williamson seems to stray from Catholic teaching. I’m not certain what level of teaching this would fall under so whether this error on Williamson’s part is worthy of excommunication under Canon Law I do not know.

As a Catholic, I can’t see why these “bishops” had their excommunication lifted. Only the Pope can appoint someone a bishop. These guys still seem to refer to themselves as bishops in open defiance of the authority of the Church while calling themselves Catholic. I could be wrong, but I think that was the original part of the excommunication.

Futher, for the Pope to lift the excommunication and still consider these men bishops would mean that the Pope has decided to affirmatively appoint these men as bishops, including Mr. Williamson.

Despite all the hullaballoo above about Ratzinger’s participation or lack thereof in Nazi organizations and the WWII German military, he is a man that lived through what happened and the aftermath. Neither he nor any other Pope could knowingly appoint a Holocaust denier as bishop without the full knowledge of what this morally repugnant act would mean to Jews and Catholics around the world who would view the action as unforgiveable.

So, again, the Pope’s actions make no sense to me, and it would be very interesting to know if the Vatican now considers Lefbvre’s bishops to be true bishops or not. Or perhaps these “bishops” have renounced their previous title as improperly bestowed without Church authority.

Which is sort of the point, isnâ€™t it? Preaching hate and insanity is kosher for leadership. But disagreeing about what language to say Mass in? ETERNAL HELLFIRE!

Excommunication isn’t an automatic sentence to Hell. The Church lacks the competence for such power that resides with God alone. Preaching hatred could be considered an offense worthy of excommunication, but teaching that homosexual behavior is sinful doesn’t fall under that for the Church leadership. I think anti-Semitism is such an offense, however, and I question whether Williamson’s error concerning Church teaching on same-sex orientation not being sinful is one as well or not. As for what action the Church should take, that’s difficult to say because politics unfortunately is a part of this as is the case in most of these instances throughout the past 2,000 years. My guess would be if Williamson’s errors or behavior offends the Vatican enough, he’ll find himself a titular bishop of an extinct diocese. The Holy See usually avoids direct excommunication until all other options are exhausted.

Only the Pope can appoint someone a bishop. These guys still seem to refer to themselves as bishops in open defiance of the authority of the Church while calling themselves Catholic. I could be wrong, but I think that was the original part of the excommunication.

Because Lefebvre held valid orders and consecrated these men as bishops in the proper, though illicit, manner that cannot be changed. Their act of being consecrated without papal consent is what made them schismatic and why they were excommunicated. That has now apparently been rectified which is why their excommunications have been lifted. Remember that this is why the Eastern Orthodox bishops are considered to be valid by the Vatican even though they are considered to be in schism.

As I understand Church teaching on this matter, which I strongly disagree with, a same-sex orientation cannot be â€œembracedâ€ because it is â€œintrinsically disorderedâ€. It can be accepted as a reality one must live with and of course having such an orientation is not sinful. That is where Williamson seems to stray from Catholic teaching. Iâ€™m not certain what level of teaching this would fall under so whether this error on Williamsonâ€™s part is worthy of excommunication under Canon Law I do not know.

Trust me, I know. I’m a former Catholic (baptized and confirmed at 18) which has excommunicated himself from the church when the CC made it clear it was not unjust to discriminate against gays in certain areas of employment back in the early 90’s. It was then I renounced the church and ever since then have believed the church has been in error regarding gays.

If you look at Roman Catholic Church history, the CC has been in error in a great many areas. Galileo and the Spanish Inquisition just to name two examples. I now see the church as being horribly corrupt and very political in worldly affairs. Which is nothing new since its history is filled with such examples. I praise God leading me out of organized religion. He now leads my life rather than the decrees of any Pope.

Sadly, it will take time before the Church comes around and accepts gay people fully as they are. I’m afraid it will not be in my lifetime tho.

The question of whether the Holocaust took place or not is purely a matter of history, not of doctrine; so the fact that it clearly did is not a part of Catholic doctrine. There is therefore no obvious reason why Uncle Joseph should take Williamson’s erroneous and eccentric beliefs on a matter of history into account when deciding to lift the excommunication.

As Jim said, “Williamsonâ€™s newsletters are a treasure-trove of paranoia, nutty conspiracies and general all-around lunacy.” So it comes as no surprise that he should be a Holocaust denier.

These Lefebvrists tend to be cranks who live in worlds of their own. I’m told that many of the French ones are looking forward to the return of the French monarchy, and that some of the Austrian ones dream of the restoration of the Austrian Empire. I’ve never knowingly come across any Lefebvrists in Italy, but if there are any, then doubtless many of them are pining for the days of Mussolini.

Oh, and the comment on the Stormfront site links to a sermon written by Bishop Williamson, where he says:
â€œâ€There was not one Jew killed in the gas chambers. It was all lies, lies, lies. The Jews created the Holocaust so we would prostrate ourselves on our knees before them and approve of their new State of Israelâ€¦. Jews made up
the Holocaust, Protestants get their orders from the devil, and the Vatican has sold its soul to liberalism.â€.

â€¦but donâ€™t bother trying to follow that link. The original article (first preached as part of a sermon delivered in 1989 in Sherbrooke, Canada), has been removed, and the site where it was posted, http://www.fatherfeeney.org/bp-williamson/bp-williamson.htm no longer exists; the site is no longer available via the â€œWayback Machineâ€ search engine, and it has been scrubbed from the Google cache as well.

I am pleased to note that you have been more restrained in your criticism of Bishop Williamson than many other blogs, which have resorted to personal abuse and name-calling.

None-the-less, I do need to take issue with your description of Bp. Williamsons’s letters and blog as “lunacy”. The Bishop is a courageous defender of traditional values and Western civilization. Yes, he’s a conservative, yes he’s politically incorrect, but he doesn’t claim to be otherwise. His charicature of himself on his blog as a dinosaur in bishop’s garb is evidence of a sense of humour, and a humility that we would do well to emulate.

I for one encourage Bishop Williamson to keep speaking the truth as he sees it.

I didn’t say it was. I said that Bishop Williamson has over the years proven to be a formidable defender of traditional Western values. Perhaps you are unaware of all the other issues he has spoken out about. This particular one has been seized on by the media because of its controversiality.

I think that the Roman Catholic Church is totally out-to-lunch on the issue of gay rights, including same sex marriage and adoption, which thankfully is legal here in B.C., Canada where I live, as their arguments don’t hold water any more. You can find homosexuality that isn’t frowned upon in the Bible and I haven’t seen any quote of Jesus condemning it. Altar girls were finally allowed and so should women priests. I also feel if priests were allowed to be married to whichever sex they choose, there would be a lot more priests and most likely less arrests/cover-ups being made for underage porn and/or pedophile charges.

Read & heard descendants of Holocaust victims talk of how they lost an aunt, uncle, cousin, etc. during Holocaust or Shoah. Many non-Jewish Slavs also had relatives killed by Nazis during Holocaust in the death camps. These people imply their relatives killed were innocents. Yes, there were kids, school teachers, housewives, etc. killed by Nazis in shootings , gassings, etc. Some of the people who were killed in Nazi deaths camps were Communists & Communism has killed more than Nazism, so you can find cases where a future Stalin, Lenin, Kim Il Sung, Mao or other Commie was killed by Nazis in concentration camps. Not all the millions killed by the Nazis were nice people.

Leave A Comment

All comments reflect the opinions of commenters only. They are not necessarily those of anyone associated with Box Turtle Bulletin. Comments are subject to our Comments Policy.

In this original BTB Investigation, we unveil the tragic story of Kirk Murphy, a four-year-old boy who was treated for “cross-gender disturbance” in 1970 by a young grad student by the name of George Rekers. This story is a stark reminder that there are severe and damaging consequences when therapists try to ensure that boys will be boys.

When we first reported on three American anti-gay activists traveling to Kampala for a three-day conference, we had no idea that it would be the first report of a long string of events leading to a proposal to institute the death penalty for LGBT people. But that is exactly what happened. In this report, we review our collection of more than 500 posts to tell the story of one nation’s embrace of hatred toward gay people. This report will be updated continuously as events continue to unfold. Check here for the latest updates.

In 2005, the Southern Poverty Law Center wrote that “[Paul] Cameron’s ‘science’ echoes Nazi Germany.” What the SPLC didn”t know was Cameron doesn’t just “echo” Nazi Germany. He quoted extensively from one of the Final Solution’s architects. This puts his fascination with quarantines, mandatory tattoos, and extermination being a “plausible idea” in a whole new and deeply disturbing light.

From the Inside: Focus on the Family’s “Love Won Out”

On February 10, I attended an all-day “Love Won Out” ex-gay conference in Phoenix, put on by Focus on the Family and Exodus International. In this series of reports, I talk about what I learned there: the people who go to these conferences, the things that they hear, and what this all means for them, their families and for the rest of us.

Using the same research methods employed by most anti-gay political pressure groups, we examine the statistics and the case studies that dispel many of the myths about heterosexuality. Download your copy today!

Anti-gay activists often charge that gay men and women pose a threat to children. In this report, we explore the supposed connection between homosexuality and child sexual abuse, the conclusions reached by the most knowledgeable professionals in the field, and how anti-gay activists continue to ignore their findings. This has tremendous consequences, not just for gay men and women, but more importantly for the safety of all our children.

Anti-gay activists often cite the “Dutch Study” to claim that gay unions last only about 1½ years and that the these men have an average of eight additional partners per year outside of their steady relationship. In this report, we will take you step by step into the study to see whether the claims are true.

Tony Perkins’ Family Research Council submitted an Amicus Brief to the Maryland Court of Appeals as that court prepared to consider the issue of gay marriage. We examine just one small section of that brief to reveal the junk science and fraudulent claims of the Family “Research” Council.

The FBI’s annual Hate Crime Statistics aren’t as complete as they ought to be, and their report for 2004 was no exception. In fact, their most recent report has quite a few glaring holes. Holes big enough for Daniel Fetty to fall through.